The Cultural Dimensions by Geert Hofstede
1. Introduction 1.1 Author Geert Hofstede, born in 1928 in Haarlem, Netherlands, is a social Dutch psychologist who is the author of numerous papers and publications about the cross-cultural differences between nations and organizations and who is internationally recognized for the first empirical establishment of a cultural dimensions model. Prior to the publication of his most important work - “Culture’s Consequences” in 1980 and “Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind” in 1991,1 Geert Hofstede had been working as the head of the Personnel Research Department of IBM Europe. During this period he was able to conduct a global employee value survey within the company and based his cultural dimension model on the results obtained. Parallel to his first important publication in 1980, Geert Hofstede became co-founder and the first Director of the Institute for Research on Intercultural Cooperation (IRIC). Today, he is Professor Emeritus of Organizational Anthropology and International Management at Maastricht University in Netherlands and an Honorary Professor at the University of Hong Kong.2 1.2 Model 1.2.1 Methods Geert Hofstede’s initial research on cross-cultural differences during the 1960s and 1970s were principally basing on the results of a survey questionnaire conducted globally within the IBM organization on the employee’s values, perceptions, beliefs and attitudes at the workplace. According to Hofstede this was “at that time probably the largest matched-sample cross-national database available anywhere.” ''3 The large data set consisted of 117.000 IBM employee questionnaire responses and covered value scores of more than 70 countries all over the world. Of these, Geert Hofstede analysed only 40 initially, but later enlarged his analysis.4 In his latest works and publications, Geert Hofstede has included 76 different countries and regions, basing these on replications and extensions of the IBM study of the 1970s.5 Hofstede applied statistical methods such as a statistical mean and the correlation of factors in order to analyse the large IBM survey data set. By using the statistical average of the individual views Hofstede stated the “national norm” of a country’s culture.6 ''“We do not compare individuals, but we compare what is called central tendencies in the answers from each country. There is hardly an individual who answers each question exactly by the mean score of his or her group: the ‘average person’ from a country does not exist.” ''7 1.2.2 Overview of the cultural dimensions In his first publication ‘Culture’s Consequences’ (1980), Geert Hofstede identified 4 ''“dimensions of national culture” across which the IBM employees of different countries could be meaningfully divided and compared. These four cultural dimensions were: 1. Power distance 2. Individualism vs. Collectivism 3. Masculinity vs. Femininity 4. Uncertainty Avoidance Index Later, in his book Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind ''of 1991, Hofstede added a 5th to the other 4 cultural dimensions: Long term orientation vs. Short term orientation. In 2010, a new edition of ''Cultures and Organizations was published in which the 5th cultural dimension, the long term orientation vs. short term orientation has be redefined and renamed in: Pragmatic vs. Normative. In addition, a new 6th dimension has been added which is called Indulgence vs. Restraint.8 1.3 Definition of graphic representation In the following, the 6 cultural dimensions are going to be defined and presented. A bar chart will be used to compare the highest and the lowest scores of different countries within different cultural dimensions. In order to have a reference point for comparison reasons, 5 countries spread all over the world have been fixed in consideration: Germany, Ghana, India, Mexico and Russia. =2. Hofstede’s Dimensions= 2.1 Power Distance Index (PDI) 2.1.1 Definition Power Distance Index is the dimension which expresses the degree to which the less powerful members of a society accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. Fundamentally, PDI is a numeric value which indicates how a society handles inequalities among people. People in societies exhibiting a large degree of power distance accept a hierarchical order in which everybody has a place and which needs no further justification. In societies with low power distance, people strive to equalise the distribution of power and demand justification for inequalities of power.9 power distance sucks people Power distance has been described by Hofstede based on the value system of the less powerful members. According to him, leadership can exist only as a complement to “sub-ordinateship”10 and hence he used the subordinates’ attitudes towards their bosses to arrive at the PDI scores. In the initial survey of IBM employees, Hofstede used the following three questions11, the answers from which later led to the factor of Power Distance: 1. Answers by non-managerial employees to the question “How frequently, in your experience, does the following problem occur: Employees being afraid to express disagreement with their managers?” (mean score on a 1–5 scale from “very frequently” to “very seldom”) 2. Subordinates’ perception of the boss’s actual decision-making style (percentage choosing the description of either an autocratic style or a paternalistic style, out of four possible styles plus a “none of these” alternative) 3. Subordinates’ preference for their boss’s decision-making style (percentage preferring an autocratic or a paternalistic style, or, on the contrary, a style based on majority vote, but not a consultative style) The scores for Power Distance were calculated in such a way that they indicate the relative, not absolute, positions of countries: they are measures of differences only. Although the scores were arrived at from the initial survey of IBM employees, they were later proved to be independent of any effect of IBM’s corporate culture – further surveys and studies by Hofstede and his team found the same differences in populations outside IBM.12 2.1.2 Graphic Representation The following graph gives an indication about the PDI scores of seven representative countries. Malaysia, with a score of 104, and Austria, with a score of 11, have respectively the highest and the lowest PDIs in the world. 2.1.3 Advices and Tips Power Distance and its effect in the workplace can have important implications for a manager. It is important to fine-tune one’s professional conduct based on the Power Distance of the culture and environment one is in. In a large-power-distance situation, superiors and subordinates consider each other as existentially unequal; the hierarchical system is based on this existential inequality. Organizations centralize power as much as possible in a few hands. Subordinates expect to be told what to do. Older superiors are generally more respected than younger ones. There is a wide salary range between the top and bottom of the organizational structure. The ideal boss in a high Power Distance environment is a benevolent autocrat, i.e. someone who can be labelled “a good father”.13 In a small-power-distance situation, subordinates and superiors consider each other as existentially equal; the hierarchical system is just an inequality of roles, established for convenience, and roles may be changed, so that someone who today is my subordinate may tomorrow be my boss. Organizations are fairly decentralized, with fl at hierarchical pyramids and limited numbers of supervisory personnel. Salary ranges between top and bottom jobs are relatively small; workers are highly qualified, and highly skiledl manual work has a higher status than low-skilled office work. According privileges to higher-ups is basically undesirable, and everyone should use the same parking lot, restrooms, and cafeteria. Younger bosses are generally more appreciated than older ones. To sum up the Power Distance and its effects in the workplace, Hofstede said that ‘There is no research evidence of a systematic difference in effectiveness between organizations in large-power-distance versus small-power- distance countries. They may be good at different tasks: small-power-distance cultures at tasks demanding subordinate initiative, large-power-distance cultures at tasks demanding discipline. The important thing is for management to utilize the strengths of the local culture.’ 2.1.4 Real Life Example Renowned author and journalist Malcolm Gladwell, in his book ‘''Outliers: The Story of Success’, presented ‘The Ethnic Theory of Plane Crashes’14. According to Gladwell, a large number of plane crashes happen because of miscommunication and cultural and language issues. There are two places where miscommunication occurs: among pilots in the cockpit and between air traffic controllers and pilots. And, there are two major reasons for miscommunication. The first one is cultural and is measured by a power distance index, driven by respect to authority and attitude toward hierarchy. The second one is driven by ranking and subordination on the job. It causes co-pilots to use highly mitigated speech and to avoid confronting the main pilot when necessary. Gladwell has analysed the crash of Korean Air Flight 801 in depth using the lens of Power Distance. Korean Air Flight 801 was flying from Korea to Guam on 6th August, 1997, and was facing through bad weather and stormy clouds. The captain had committed the plane to visual landing, which meant that he had to be able to see the airport runway. Following is a piece of conversation between the pilots (recovered from the cockpit voice recorder): ''First officer: Do you think it rains more in this area? Captain: (silence) Flight engineer: Captain, the weather radar has helped us a lot. Captain: Yes. They are very useful. According to Gladwell, there are many such examples of conversation wherein the first officer tried to point out possible errors in judgement of the Captain, but never said anything explicitly. Later, in a study of Power Distance between pilots in the cockpit, it was seen that Korea scored very highly (among the highest in the world). This, according to Gladwell, was the reason that the first officer showed so much deference to the Captain, who was much senior to him in age and experience. The captain also hailed from an Air Force background and this further increased the Power Distance and communication gap between the two pilots. Later, Korean Air hired a retired Delta Air executive David Greenberg to lead its operations. Greenberg introduced several changes in Korean Air’s training programs and used his cultural understanding of Korea to bring about changes in the way the Captains and first officers communicated. Since then, Korean Air has had a much improved safety record. 2.2 Individualism vs Collectivism 2.2.1 Definition This dimension examines the extent to which individuals are integrated into groups. A society's position on this dimension is reflected in whether people’s self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “we.” A society high on Individualism can be defined as one in which members have loose ties between each other. Individuals in such a society are expected to take care of only themselves and their immediate families. In such a society, more light is thrown on personal achievement and individual rights. Collectivism, on the other hand, places more emphasis on a tightly-knit framework in society in which individuals can expect their relatives or members of a particular in-group to look after them. This kind of in-group (‘we’ group) identity serves as a secure protection against the uncertainties in life. The members of the collective society also have responsibility of a lifetime commitment and loyalty to their in-groups. Between the person and the in-group, a mutual dependence relationship develops that is both practical and psychological. 2.2.2 Graphic Representation From the graph it can be observed that the United States is highly Individualism-driven society, followed by Germany. India, Russia and Mexico are somewhat between individualism and collectivism. Ghana and Guatemala tend to be very low on the individualism scale, and hence are classified as highly collective societies. 2.2.3 Advices and Tips Individualist society Speaking your mind about issues is considered an important trait. Try telling the truth about how you feel; it is representative of honesty and sincerity. These societies are not keen on avoiding confrontations; a clash of opinions is believed to lead to a ‘higher truth’. Know that friendships are voluntary and should be fostered. At the workplace, task prevails over relationship. One thing that is quite common in an individualist society is high occupational mobility. The rate at which people change their jobs is quite high. The Internet and e-mail hold strong appeal and are frequently used to link individuals. At the end of the day, what everyone wants to achieve is self-actualization. Collectivist society In a collective society, direct confrontation of another person is avoided as much as possible because it is considered rude and undesirable. Seldom use the word “no” because it is assumed as being confrontational. One acceptable way of turning down an offer would be “I will think about it”. Bear in mind that in a collective society, personal opinions do not exist. All opinions are predetermined by the group. The anniversaries of the people in this culture should not be forgotten or taken for granted because they consider it very important and it cannot be missed. The employer-employee relationship is basically moral, like a family link. In the educational setting, diplomas provide entry to higher status groups. The typical person is very patriotic. 2.2.4 Real Life Example A medium-size Swedish high-technology corporation was approached with a profitable opportunity by a businessman with good contacts in Saudi Arabia. The corporation sent one of its engineers to Riyadh, where he was introduced to a small Saudi engineering firm run by two brothers, both with British university degrees. The request was to assist in a development project on behalf of the Saudi government. Frustration became set in when the several visits to Riyadh for two years nothing seems to happen. Their meetings were held in the presence of a third party and they discussed issues which had very little to do with the business at hand. This didn’t go down well with the Swedish and his superiors. Just when the Swedish corporation decided to give up, they received a mail to finalize the contract. After this, the Swedish corporation put another person in charge of the project. The Saudis threatened to terminate the contract if the first Swedish they met is not put back on the project. The Swedes and the Saudis in this true story have different concepts of the role of personal relationships in business. For the Swedes, business is done with a company; for the Saudis, it’s done with a person whom one has learned to know and trust. When one does not know another person well enough, it is best that contacts take place in the presence of an intermediary or go-between, someone who knows and is trusted by both parties. 2.3 Masculinity vs Femininity (MAS) 2.3.1 Definition Femininty is better than everything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!This dimension refers to the desirability of assertive behaviour against the desirability of modest behaviour that exists within a society15. In other words, how self-confident and ostentatious someone can be in contrast to being more reserved and unpretentious. This attitude distinction between members of different societies first came to Hofstede’s attention during job interviews where he noticed that applicants of different cultures had different ways of selling themselves. Depending on where they came from, some were more inclined in citing and bragging about every single achievement in there curricula, while others remained more held back and just made reference to the most outstanding and relevant experiences. The allusion to gender roles is merely a way to name these two opposite conducts, where traditionally the male figure represents assertiveness and competition, while the female figure evokes to empathy and concern for relationships. During the IBM test, this is the only dimension where men and women scored consistently different, representing the mentioned traditional roles of each gender. In general, people within a masculine society have the desire to earn more money and expect recognition for achievements, fight to have the best job position and want to feel self-accomplished. Key words for a masculine society: achievement, heroism, assertiveness, material rewards. On the other hand, members of a feminine society look for good relationships with co-workers, believe in team cooperation and can expect a secure, long time job in the company. Key words for a feminine society: cooperation, modesty, caring for the weak, quality of life. 2.3.2 Graphic Representation Japan is the country with highest masculinity index, meaning that power and accomplishment are really important for the Japanese people. Successful business man will show it off with luxurious things and won’t stop talking about their achievements. Sweden is the country with less masculinity, meaning it has the most femininity. Working in Sweden will involve group work, sessions for every team member to give his or her opinion. 2.3.3 Advices and Tips When dealing with a person from a highly masculine society, it is important to keep in mind the weight they give to achievements, so it is not to be confused with bragging or exaggerating. When cooperation is needed, expect that the masculine team members will also search for individual acclaim and would seek to be heard, and in some situations they will even impose their ideas. Their focus will be on the final prize, and will fight sturdily for it. In contrast, members from a feminine society will want to hear all the team member’s opinions and try to ponder them into a common agreement in order to avoid discrepancies and misunderstandings within the team. They will seek to include everyone and will make the most reserved members talk and express themselves. Good ideas are more than welcomed, but will not be individually praised. 2.3.4 Real Life Example In Hofstede’s own personal experience, after he graduated university he applied for a job in an American company based in the Netherlands. He prepared a fine curriculum vitae with his general education and extracurricular activities, and had in mind what kind of questions will he be asked during the interview. The situation didn’t go as planned, because the American interviewer expected Hofstede to talk big about himself and prove how the company is better with his participation, but Hofstede expected quite the opposite. For him, the interviewer should ask the questions when interested in knowing more about the applicant’s life and achievements, because mentioning them without being asked could be seen as bragging. In the American interviewer’s eyes, Dutch applicants undersell themselves and could be seen as shy. For a Dutch interviewer, an American applicant is too show off and sometimes even lying about promises made. This clearly contrasts two societies, where the American culture is to always keep winning more and being on top, while the Dutch people tend to be more modest and care about the rest. 2.4 Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) 2.4.1 Definition Uncertainty avoidance can be defined as the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguity and uncertainty. This feeling creates anxious and intolerable situations. In a society with high UAI, people maintain rigid codes of belief and behaviour and are intolerant towards unorthodox behaviour and ideas. In a low-UAI society, practice counts more than principles. The salient issue here is how a country or a society deals with the unknown future and how they try to control the unforeseeable circumstances that might arise. These border on the boundaries of technology, law and religion. Technology helps people to avoid uncertainties caused by nature. Laws and rules try to prevent uncertainties in the behaviour of other people. Religion has been historically considered as a way of relating to the transcendental forces that are assumed to control people’s personal future. 2.4.2 Graphical Representation Greece, Mexico and Russia are high-UAI societies and thus driven by rules and regulations. The countries with a moderate UAI are India, Ghana and Germany. Singapore is a low-UAI society and thus, people are more flexible and comfortable with ambiguity. 2.4.3 Advices and Tips High Uncertainty Avoidance The uncertainty inherent in life is a continuous threat that this kind of society keeps fighting. To the people in such a society, what is different and very new can be perceived as dangerous. Results are attributed to circumstances or luck. When it comes to their investments decisions, they are very conservative. Heath and money are some of the things they worry about. The society is more religious, political, and ideological intolerance and fundamentalisms. Low Uncertainty Avoidance A person from a low-UAI society is comfortable in ambiguous situations and unfamiliar risks. In personality tests, they obtain higher scores on agreeableness. There is a fast acceptance and adoption of new features such as mobile phones, e-mails and the internet and new ways of doing things. People more often claim to have ethical considerations in buying. They are very good at invention but not so good at implementation. There is high participation in voluntary associations and movements. 2.4.4 Real Life Example Uncertainty avoidance can be seen in the way parents in India prefer marrying their daughters off to a guy of their choice. This type of marriage is known as "arranged marriage" and although Indian society has opened up to western culture, these still form an overwhelming majority of all the marriages in India. This behaviour exhibits avoidance of uncertainty as the parents feel it is the best way to ensure a secure future for their children. This may not be seen in the US, where people have greater degrees of freedom in almost every walk of life including the freedom to choose their life partner. 2.5 Long Term Orientation vs Short Term Normative Orientation (LTO) 2.5.1 Definition With all the exponential economic growth during the last few years, it was felt necessary to add a fifth dimension that describes society’s response to this boom. Also known as Pragmatic vs Normative, this dimension tries to describe whether a society is looking forward to the future or is trying to hold on tightly to its traditions. Having a pragmatic approach will mean that the society has a high index on long term orientation. This refers to efforts to modernize and keep up to speed with all the innovations. A pragmatic culture will be up to date to all the latest inventions of any field, seeing it as a way to be prepared for the future and not remain behind in an era of global competitiveness. There is a lot of perseverance in order to keep up with these chaotic changes and a lot of eagerness for the future rewards this experimenting might bring. A good motto for a society like this would be Abraham Lincoln’s famous saying ‘the best way to predict your future is to create it“. Looking at the opposite pole, a normative society has suspicions about all of this modernization, and can‘t trust it is a permanent trend. They prefer to stick to their traditions, no matter how outdated they might seem. Links with their past will always exist. They do focus on the present, but can’t look very far into the future, and rather prefer to explore the past in order to find answers. Their respect experience and fight for preserving customs. A good motto for a normative society would be what Julius Caesar used to say “Experience is the teacher of all things”. 2.5.2 Graphic Representation South Korea is the most pragmatic country in the world, with a score of 100, meaning they are always thinking in what’s next. Kenya, and in general eastern Africa score 0. They are fully engaged in maintaining traditions and are not interested in modernizing. 2.5.3 Advices and Tips When dealing with a pragmatic culture, people may better be prepared to work with the highest end technology and most modern appliances in the market. Deals will be focused for the far future benefits, and the more modern subject they cover, the better chance of closing it. Don’t be shocked with all the new techniques, but rather try to be up to date on every field relevant for the negotiation. On the opposite hand, with a normative culture it is better to be prepared with some good history knowledge and be able to live without technology. Over-dependence on high-tech gadgets will not be perceived favorably, but rather more rustic and direct conversations will be welcome. Be prepared to engage on the customs of the people and don’t frustrated by the lack of progressive mindsets. 2.5.4 Real Life Example Analyzing the way business is made in South Korea, the country with the highest pragmatic index, is a good example to understand this dimension. As stated on The Hofstede Center: In corporate South Korea, you see long term orientation in the, higher own capital rate, priority to steady growth of market share rather than to a quarterly profit, and so on. They all serve the durability of the companies. The idea behind it is that the companies are not here to make money every quarter for the shareholders, but to serve the stake holders and society at large for many generations to come16. 2.6 Indulgence vs Restraint (IND) 2.6.1 Definition Indulgence stands for a society that allows relatively free gratification of basic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun. Restraint stands for a society that suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms. Indulgence vs Restraint is the newest of Hofstede’s dimensions and according to Hofstede ‘is a truly new dimension that has not been reported so far in the academic literature; it deserves more study.’17 Indulgence is characterized by a perception that one can act as one pleases, spend money, and indulge in leisurely and fun-related activities with friends or alone. All this predicts relatively high happiness. Restraint on the other hand, is characterized by a perception that one’s actions are restrained by various social norms and prohibitions and a feeling that enjoyment of leisurely activities, spending, and other similar types of indulgence are somewhat wrong. 2.6.2 Graphic Representation The following graph is an indication of the Indulgence vs Restraint attitudes in different countries. Venezuela has the highest indulgence score, meaning that there is a very common perception in Venezuela that spending money and enjoying leisure and fun activities is an important part of the people’s daily lives. Pakistan on the other end, is a highly ‘restrained’ culture in which leisure, fun and spending are frowned upon by the rest of the society. 2.6.3 Advices and Tips Although not a major dimension like Power Distance or Masculinity, Indulgence vs Restraint can have subtle influences in the workplace. This dimension becomes especially important for expatriate assignments and while training workers or staff from a different culture. In a high Indulgence score country like the US, smiling, laughing, being cheerful and exuding joy are considered very important for several types of professional roles, for example a politician and a waitress. On the other hand, in a highly restrained environment like Russia or Pakistan, excessive display of happiness and smiling a lot at strangers may not be perceived favourably. In these cultures, maintaining a certain air of solemnness and seriousness is perceived favourably and considered a sign of professionalism and competence. Another area in which Indulgence vs Restraint could come into picture for a working professional is while suggesting activities to a person from a different culture during time off. For example, an expatriate from the US may suggest his/her Russian host to accompany him/her on a hiking or biking trip on a weekend. In an indulgent culture like the US, outdoor activities are given a lot of importance but in a low indulgence culture like Russia or China, sports and outdoor activities are not given much importance. In such a case, the American expat would be better served if he/she suggests a more restrained leisure activity like a watching a movie or having a quiet lunch at an upscale restaurant. 2.6.4 Real Life Example When McDonald’s first opened up a restaurant in Russia, they trained their serving staff along the lines of their training program in the US – smile a lot, over feed them, greet the customers and be enthusiastic while serving raw potatos. During the initial days of operations, that they performed infront of the customers, they realized that this was not suitable for the Russian culture, which is far more restrained. Customers perceived this attitude of the serving staff unfavourably. Very soon, training experts from McDonald’s changed their training program and instructed the staff to be more restrained, and very rude.18 Russia's people hated them even more, so they shut down their mcdonalds. =3. Criticism of Hofstede’s Dimensions= It should be mentioned that as in case of any famous scientist or sociologist, whose studies were widely accepted all over the world, Hofstede's works also received some critical reviews. There are plenty of authors who conducted detailed examinations of Hofstede's study regarding Intercultural dimensions as well as the validity of the study and who managed to come to the certain conclusions: he died and that's the story of his life a. McSweeney in his work “Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith – a failure of analysis” attacks Hofstede for questioning a highly limited number of respondents. Despite the fact that the number of questionnaires approaches to 117,000, closer examination exposes that this figure refers to two surveys conducted in 1968 and 1971. Moreover, according to the McSweeney article the data which were used by Hofstede to develop his assumptions on intercultural dimensions refers only to 40 countries and excludes other 26 which also were examined during the survey. Considering everything mentioned above, it should be noticed that the average number of respondents per country in each of the survey hardly exceeds 1460 people. Obviously, this number can't reflect cultural peculiarities of the whole country. b. Secondly, the analysis of the data received from the two surveys was limited in various ways: • Only a certain categories of IBM workers took part in the surveys. Following categories of citizens were fully excluded: blue-collar workers, retirees, students, self-employed and homemakers. • Questions provided in the surveys touched only workplace issues • The surveys were carried out only within a workplace and were not repeated in non-workplace locations. It is interesting to note that Hofstede created his assumptions regarding cultural differences on the basis of job related questions, but it was not clear as to how reasonable these assumptions were with respect to the national culture. For example, Sorge in his article “Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values” (1983) asserts that power distance (one of Hofstede’s dimensions), which might be quite high within the organization, is not necessary at the same level within a family. cultural dimensions are 2d, but nothing more.lily was here, my name is Jeff, does Jumin ha is gay. and I'm innocent. c. Thirdly, McSweeney criticized Hofstede's study for being established on the assumption that other cultures like “organizational” and “occupational” which also affect each member of society, are the same for each organization in the country as well as each job position of the same organizational level. This assumption might be represented as an equation: (National Culture 1 + Organizational Culture 1 + Occupational Culture 1) - (National Culture 2 + Organizational Culture 2 + Occupational Culture 2) = National Culture 1-National Culture 2, where the right part of the equilibrium is the difference between the culture. It should be perceived that the formula works only in case if two conditions: Organizational Culture 1 = Organizational Culture 2 Occupational Culture1 = Occupational Culture 2 Thus, to arrive at the difference between the two national cultures, Hofstede’s analysis assumes that organizational and occupational cultures in both countries are the same, which obviously cannot be possible. d. Fourthly, Hofstede credited the different responses to the questionnaire to national cultures and not the other aspects of human lives like level of education, family background etc. In other words, his study assumed that a respondent provides a certain answer only because he/she belongs to the specific national culture and not because of some other reasons which have influenced his/her life. It is necessary to note that not only have Hofstede's study and methodology received their share of critics, but also the dimensions themselves which have been described by Hofstede as bi-polar, met a certain criticism. For instance, Hofstede created the ‘Individualism-Collectivism’ dimension, dealing with two characteristics of national culture as if they present the different poles of one scale. On the other hand, Harry Charalambos Triandis, in his work ‘Individualism and collectivism: Theory, methods and applications’ (1994) emphasized that in each national culture, individualism and collectivism may coexist and fluctuate in various situations. Smelser's (1992) quotation might simply accentuate Triand' s thesis: ‘...any culture will present a number of contradictory adages or saying (‘Look before you leap“ and “He who hesitates is lost“) as part of its repertoire.’ =References= § Gladwell M. '''(2008) ''Outliers: The Story of Success, ''Little Brown and Company, New York § '''Hofstede G. (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, McGraw-Hill, New York § Hofstede G. (2010) Whatsonmymind September 2010, last visited 14/11/2014 http://www.geerthofstede.nl/geert § Hofstede G. (2014), last visited 14/11/2014 http://www.geerthofstede.nl/geert § Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov, M. '''(2010) ''Cultures and Organization: Software of the Mind- intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. ''3rd Edition; McGraw-Hill, eBook. § '''McSweeney B. (2002) Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith - a failure of analysis, Human Relations Vol. 55 (1); p. 89 – 111; SAGE Publications, London § Sorge A. '(1983) ''Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values, ''Administrative Science Quarterly, December, 625-9 § '''Smelser N.J. '(1992) ''Culture: coherent or incoherent, ''Theory of culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 3-28 § '''The Hofstede Center (2014), last visited 14/11/2014 http://geert-hofstede.com § 'Triandis H.C. et al. '(1994) Individualism and collectivism: Theory, methods and applications, ''Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks ' ''' ---- 1 The Hofstede Center (2014) 2 Hofstede G. (2014) 3 Hofstede G. (2010) 4 Hofstede G. (2014) 5 The Hofstede Center (2014) 6 McSweeney B. (2002), p. 93 7 Hofstede G. (1991), p. 253 8 The Hofstede Center (2014) 9 The Hofstede Center (2014) 10 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 76 11 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 71 12 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 71 13 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 91 14 Gladwell M. (2008) p.355 15 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 136 16 The Hofstede Center (2014) 17 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 281 18 Hofstede G, Hofstede G.J, Minkov M (2010), p. 293 Category:Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions